Please consider longer times between updates

[I_Killed_Jeb]

This is probably bound to be an unpopular opinion here where many favor the "more, sooner" approach, but....

 

I really wish the KSP dev team will consider extending the development cycle for these updates. 90% of the new development plan seems to be part refreshes with a small surprise feature polish/addition thrown in. I think they are honestly best served holding onto all of them and packaging into a single big update that drops every 6-9 months, even a year.

First and foremost, it helps keeps the mods going IMO. Let's face it, this community is a shell of its former self, not surprising for a quite an old game. But this means there are FAR fewer people able to update mods, many of which I think a lot of us refuse to play without. A longer cycle will give them all some breathing room, some time to refresh/recharge.

The piecemeal updates currently makes things look jankier because there are so many discordant art style at this time. Updating all the parts at once will give everything some uniformity which appears to a primary purpose of this current overhaul.

Lastly, a big update pushed out infrequently probably makes a bigger news splash and thus able to generate more sales/return players. This is speculation on my part but I think big splashy updates sell better than incremental frequent ones.

What say you, KSP people?

 

* Yes I'm aware people can save old versions of KSP to play separately.

[Vanamonde]

This suggestion for the game's development has been moved to Suggestions & Development. 

[Chel]

Not to start a fight here or anything, but here is my opinion. You're complaining about the frequency of updates, while Enhanced Edition hasn't received anything for a whole year! Your mods are getting outdated, we have no mods! No offence, but be thankful that you are even receiving updates in the first place! If SQUAD was to implement your suggestion and have a big update every 6 or 9 months, people would start complaining about the lack of updates, and demand them to be more frequently. You should be happy about getting updates. Another thing, is that you can simply not update KSP until all your mods are compatible with the newest version, and then update to prevent issues. Again, this is just my own opinion. I do not wish to start a fight or anything.

 

- Cat

[I_Killed_Jeb]

2 minutes ago, The_Cat_In_Space said:

Not to start a fight here or anything, but here is my opinion. You're complaining about the frequency of updates, while Enhanced Edition hasn't received anything for a whole year! Your mods are getting outdated, we have no mods! No offence, but be thankful that you are even receiving updates in the first place! If SQUAD was to implement your suggestion and have a big update every 6 or 9 months, people would start complaining about the lack of updates, and demand them to be more frequently. You should be happy about getting updates. Another thing, is that you can simply not update KSP until all your mods are compatible with the newest version, and then update to prevent issues. Again, this is just my own opinion. I do not wish to start a fight or anything.

 

- Cat

I didn't "complain" about anything

Considering "our" PC purchases funded "your" console version, if anything you should be thankful you have a version at all? For a guy not wanting to start a fight you sure use some fighting words

[Chel]

1 minute ago, I_Killed_Jeb said:

For a guy not wanting to start a fight you sure use some fighting words

Okay

[Barzon]

I agree with @The_Cat_In_Space. At least we get updates, they have hardly any. Including the update they are making now, that is less than 5 (I think). While you wait for your favourite mods, do what I do, try stock again for a bit, and then as mods are gradually updated, try out new ones, then when your favourite mods are updated then you can install them, along with any new mods you might have discovered while waiting.

We in comparison have had, since the release of KSP, over 70 updates.

Edited March 6, 2019 by Barzon Kerman

[razark]

If Squad reduces the frequency of updates, there will be a segment of users that complain.

If Squad continues the current plan, there will be a segment of users that complain.

Hell, there are users that complain that Squad continues to update the game in the first place.

If Squad focuses on fixing bugs, some will complain about the lack of new content.

When Squad adds new content, some complain about the lack of fixes.

 

Doesn't matter what Squad does, people are going to complain.

[Barzon]

Moved to earlier comment.

Edited March 6, 2019 by Barzon Kerman

[Lisias]

On a personal note, I would be happy with a somewhat semantic versioning. The frequency of the update would be a minor issue (if an issue at all) if I could rely on the version number to foresee possible breaking changes.

KSP 1.4.4 should be "1.5.0" an my book, due the breakage on some Add'On. Nothing really changed to the 1.5.1 (mainly bug fixes and new features). It appears to me that version should be, really, "1.5.4". 

Of course, I'm ignoring any API or feature novelties, I'm focused on the perceptible effects on Add'On authoring.

Edited March 20, 2019 by Lisias
tasting my own medicine :)

[Superfluous J]

Considering how the vast majority of mods still work just fine for multiple versions, this is not really a problem. I mean, I've not even installed a compiler on my new computer because I've not needed to even recompile my (admittedly simple) mod.

Sure some mods need tweaking and some modders add mod breaking code for new versions, but those tend to be fixed quickly, almost by design.

Also the changes to the game over the past few updates have been pretty positive. Sure there are a couple new parts and a couple dozen reskins each time, but we also got part variants, dV readings, and localization. Which was HUGE even though most of us aren't affected by it directly.

[Lisias]

On 3/6/2019 at 1:41 AM, 5thHorseman said:

Considering how the vast majority of mods still work just fine for multiple versions, this is not really a problem. I mean, I've not even installed a compiler on my new computer because I've not needed to even recompile my (admittedly simple) mod.

You should fork a bunch of them and code review them  

A huge amount of small things that used to work fine is broken somehow (some of them mangling the savegames and crafts to problems), but since this doesn't crash the game, people doesn't notice it immediately. But then small glitches came from nowhere start to annoy the users, and this usually tends to reflect negatively on KSP. Small things tends to cause a huge grievance as the time goes by.

Deep dive on my forks (mainly the Unofficial ones), I'm documenting everything I find there.

 

On 3/6/2019 at 1:41 AM, 5thHorseman said:

Also the changes to the game over the past few updates have been pretty positive. Sure there are a couple new parts and a couple dozen reskins each time, but we also got part variants, dV readings, and localization. Which was HUGE even though most of us aren't affected by it directly.

It's my opinion too (and I am not shy about telling it). Even the last "heavy" breakage that happened on the 1.4.4 ended up being hugely positive in performance, it had worth the pain. I just preferred that it happened on a 1.5.0 version, I didn't expected such breakage on a minor release.

Expectation is the keyword. Glitches and breakage are not a problem. Unexpected glitches and breakage are.

I'm usually all by "meta-Add'Ons" like Kerbal Konstruction and Firespitter - where one tries to abstract and include features to make Add'On authoring easier. Something breaks heavily? The bad news: everything relying on them break too. The good news: you fix them, everything is fixed at the same time too.  

Edited March 20, 2019 by Lisias
tasting my own medicine :)

[Xurkitree]

I'm pretty sure that the KSP Dev team is ensuring new of updates break as few mods as possible hence I really don't have to update mods unless I want to. The only mod that does break is Kopernicus even between major versions but then that's explicitly version locked and is a special snowflake on its own. The current update cycle is fine by me, especially since they seem to be adding QoL features every 3 months now.

[Lisias]

On 3/6/2019 at 4:15 AM, Xurkitree said:

I'm pretty sure that the KSP Dev team is ensuring new of updates break as few mods as possible hence I really don't have to update mods unless I want to. 

I don't care (too much) about such breaks. Things change, and you can't be a prisoneer of the past.

I just stated what would made my life a bit happier when such things happens.

 

On 3/6/2019 at 4:15 AM, Xurkitree said:

 The only mod that does break is Kopernicus even between major versions but then that's explicitly version locked and is a special snowflake on its own. 

You are wrong.

Kopernicus is one Ad'On that breaks loudly, and this is a good thing. Silent breaks (as we had with TweakScale) are the nasty ones.

but, and again, things change and we need to learn how to cope with it. I just stated something that would made things a little easier to cope. At least to me.

 

 

Edited March 20, 2019 by Lisias
tasting my own medicine :)

[JedTech]

7 hours ago, The_Cat_In_Space said:

Enhanced Edition hasn't received anything for a whole year!

Lucky.

[Chel]

13 hours ago, JedTech said:

Lucky.

Lucky? How is that lucky, friend

[JoaquinJAR]

22 hours ago, Vanamonde said:

This suggestion for the game's development has been moved to Suggestions & Development. 

 

22 hours ago, I_Killed_Jeb said:

This is probably bound to be an unpopular opinion here where many favor the "more, sooner" approach, but....

 

I really wish the KSP dev team will consider extending the development cycle for these updates. 90% of the new development plan seems to be part refreshes with a small surprise feature polish/addition thrown in. I think they are honestly best served holding onto all of them and packaging into a single big update that drops every 6-9 months, even a year.

First and foremost, it helps keeps the mods going IMO. Let's face it, this community is a shell of its former self, not surprising for a quite an old game. But this means there are FAR fewer people able to update mods, many of which I think a lot of us refuse to play without. A longer cycle will give them all some breathing room, some time to refresh/recharge.

The piecemeal updates currently makes things look jankier because there are so many discordant art style at this time. Updating all the parts at once will give everything some uniformity which appears to a primary purpose of this current overhaul.

Lastly, a big update pushed out infrequently probably makes a bigger news splash and thus able to generate more sales/return players. This is speculation on my part but I think big splashy updates sell better than incremental frequent ones.

What say you, KSP people?

 

* Yes I'm aware people can save old versions of KSP to play separately.

well, i like this and dont at the same time. i think they should have 2 teams, one fully working on the big update,

and other releasing small updates some times to fix bugs and things

[klgraham1013]

On 3/5/2019 at 6:48 PM, razark said:

Hell, there are users that complain that Squad continues to update the game in the first place.

...

I do wish Squad would just go on a bug hunt and finish the game.  I like finished products.

[Chel]

9 hours ago, klgraham1013 said:

...

I do wish Squad would just go on a bug hunt and finish the game.  I like finished products.

If they just focused on bugs, as @razark said, people would complain about lack of new content

[klgraham1013]

1 hour ago, The_Cat_In_Space said:

If they just focused on bugs, as @razark said, people would complain about lack of new content

That's fine.  People are allowed to complain.  You can't, and should never, try to please everyone.  Create your vision.  Learn to finish what you start.  Do the best you can, even with the little things.

[ZooNamedGames]

5 hours ago, klgraham1013 said:

That's fine.  People are allowed to complain.  You can't, and should never, try to please everyone.  Create your vision.  Learn to finish what you start.  Do the best you can, even with the little things.

Catch is, some don't want an end. Especially when it doesn't have to end. Bug squashing? Sure. But if that's the final update, then that's a bit depressing, there's so many things KSP could still achieve in stock content.

That said I agree that updates should be slowed as these; retexture 3-4 things, add a mod feature, something original, wait, and release update, wait, wait, wait, go to 1, rinse, and repeat.

[klgraham1013]

7 hours ago, ZooNamedGames said:

Catch is, some don't want an end.

That's fine, but everything is finite.  Including Squad's finances.  We've seen enough regressions and new bugs on Squad's part.  I just want them to actually plan for an end, and not suddenly run out of money and leave the players with whatever new bug got introduced.  

[klgraham1013]

7 hours ago, ZooNamedGames said:

there's so many things KSP could still achieve in stock content.

There's a lot of things stock KSP could of been.  After 5+ years, I just don't know how much more hope I can muster.

[ZooNamedGames]

1 hour ago, klgraham1013 said:

There's a lot of things stock KSP could of been.  After 5+ years, I just don't know how much more hope I can muster.

KSP will certainly never achieve anything if they just give up outright.